Enabling Future Global Green Cities


world_metro_map_speckcase-p176137709186601317vu9ql_400.jpg

Between 2000 and 2030 the global urban footprint will double,
mostly due to growth in developing nation cities. Urban carbon and resource
impacts cannot, must not double during this period. What can be done by
policymakers, the private sector, civil society and urban leaders to prevent
the unthinkable, a global climate and ecosystem incapable of supporting stable species
populations and food production?

A botched transition to the coming urban future will ensure
stresses far beyond our comprehension.

So, I will be addressing the Global Green
Cities Symposium
in San Francisco Feb. 24 on “Enabling Future Global Green Cities.” In
my previous post I described how this event acknowledges a sense of urgency by taking
a novel approach to expert and cross-industry collaboration.

Clearly, cities in developing nations are the crux of the
matter: 90% of projected urban growth will occur in developing nation metros during the
next decades. By 2040, the developing nation urban sector will benefit from an
estimated total of more than $300 trillion in expenditures for the built
environment and transportation, both in infrastructure and operations. Increasingly
these city functions and services will be optimized to address both climate
change mitigation and climate change adaptation.

Before getting to the how, let’s address the issue of cities
on the basic level of benefits and risks.

Pros of increased urbanism:

  • easier provision of lower-cost high-value services (healthcare, education, water, transportation, communications, commerce)
  • enhanced cultural activities and opportunities
  • urban economic innovation in global hubs benefit their surrounding rural regions, and especially national economies

Cons of increased urbanism:

  • increased pollution and concentration of
    wastes, congestion, urban-heat island effect
  • negative social impacts which can include loss
    of sense of community, isolation from nature and decreased safety and
    security, exacerbated by a large-scale lack of affordable housing
  • sprawled urban borders place natural resources
    (agricultural land, habitat, fisheries, watersheds) at much greater risk

Beyond the pros and cons of urbanization, the populations
and economies of all cities are vulnerable to the increasingly severe impacts
of global climate change, including rising sea levels, flooding, winter storms,
drought and extreme heat events. Besides higher rates of death and
disease from climate change-induced environmental conditions, mass population
migrations are expected to occur in the not-distant future. From New Orleans
to Bangladesh,
urban climate-related population diasporas have already begun.

Cities will need to
quickly begin shifting their spending from high-carbon intensity infrastructure
to green infrastructure that produces very low carbon emissions in production,
transport, implementation and maintenance.

Long-term and strategic action plans will be necessary to
guide capital toward infrastructure solutions offering attractive
returns on investment. Such returns can take many forms–reduced operating costs
(including reuse and disposal), low embodied and operating carbon emissions, lower air
and water pollution levels, and greater resource efficiency.

Global competitiveness may soon be defined in part by comparative carbon
emission rates. Low-carbon urban economies, for instance, will gain a decisive
edge over economies (urban, exurban or rural) that remain relatively heavy
per-capita carbon emitters. This competitive advantage will be gained not only
because of environmental and quality of life factors but also because of the
potential merger of international trade rules and carbon emissions regulations.

The OECD Mayors Roundtable in 2010
recommended that urban policy makers pursue integrated policy in three areas: the adjustment of firms to new sustainability related
business opportunities and energy volatility; enabling individual consumers or citizens to change their preferences
for products and services, and, finally; developing and effectively diffusing green
technologies in the marketplace.

Following are other leading strategies and recommendations
that will be covered in the United Nations “Shanghai Training Manual for
Sustainable Cities”
.
 (In order to be more likely to succeed, multi-sector
collaboration and transparency will be required of each):

  •  New integrated, long-term and multi-scale models
    for structuring, managing, measuring and financing city performance (e.g.,
    World Bank Eco2 Cities program)
    including life-cycle energy/ carbon, maintenance and capital cost management across
    budgets, capital planning and large-scale investments. Early examples include Curitiba,
    Brazil, and a Stockholm industrial district.
  • Mega-region and regional planning approaches,
    including those with “cascaded” micro-planning, such as Greater London (pdf).
  • Community-based natural disaster management, such as the Dhaka example (pdf)
  • Core ICT Planning and Strategy: With e-planning ICT can help cities avoid
    high-carbon land use. Digital technology
    makes it possible for cities to achieve lower carbon emissions from better planning
    and management of infrastructure, buildings, energy and transportation. ICT can
    provide valuable public access in communications and governance, such as Mumbai’s
    e-government
    platform.
  • Public-private partnerships that are well constructed.
    Early examples include South Korea’s Smart Grid 2030,
    and
    China’s Guangdong Province wastewater projects.
    Public-private
    partnership agreements should be part of a transparent public
    process that is beneficial to all parties, especially citizens.
  • “In situ”
    slum upgrading
    , versus indiscriminately tearing down slums. Vulnerabilities must be addressed for those slums that are located in areas
    particularly at risk to climate change, such as flood plains and land subject
    to severe storm erosion. The good news, however, is that
    most urban slums are high
    density, pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use, made from recycled material, adaptive
    to changing conditions and can be socially inclusive with strong neighborhood
    social networks.

Green urbanization has the potential to shape the 21st
century as much or more than earlier economic and technological advances. The
key difference between this trend and prior economic waves–transportation,
communications, energy, advanced materials and industrialization–will be the
use of integrated urban system approaches.

Bonafide global green cities will only be
fully realized through combined cultural, managerial and
technological innovation that is constantly guided by the active participation of the civil and
private sectors, academia and government.

Let’s all get busy…

(“World Metro Map” image credit)

Warren
Karlenzig is president of Common
Current
. He is a fellow at the Post-Carbon Institute, strategic adviser to
the Institute for Strategic Resilience and co-author of
a
forthcoming United Nations manual on global sustainable city planning and
management. 
 

Share

Global Green Cities Preview


guangzhou-brt-1.JPG

From Singapore’s high tech congestion management system to New York’s
PlaNYC 2030 to Yokohama’s zero-carbon emissions goal, the future greening of
cities is becoming our global “Plan A” for survival–economic and
species–and will be the topic of the “Global Green Cities” conference in San
Francisco, Feb. 23-25. The invitation-only event will mash up top planners,
designers, strategists, technologists, mayors and financiers on how design,
technology and behavior can facilitate the cross-fertilization of critical
ideas and perspectives.

By now most have heard that cities will be the century’s
Rosetta Stone to mitigating the resource depletion and carbon emissions of
humanity. China alone will add 400-700 million people to its cities by 2050.
Developing nation urban growth is set to double by 2030 the urban footprint
that existed way back in 2000.

If you are old enough to read these words, you will be living in a whole new world than
the one in which you grew up.

The global cities of 2030 will be created with ten
times the speed it took to cobble together the global cities of 2000, which has
acute sustainability implications. That’s why international organizations
ranging from the United Nations to Natural Resources Defense Council are
feverishly creating strategic plans and training for green city innovation
including energy supply and energy efficiency, land use and planning, green
building, water supply and use, food supply and production, green
infrastructure, and enabling information and communications technologies.

The financial sector is well aware that 90 percent of
urban economic growth will come in developing nations, so the leaders of The
World Bank
, the IMF and private banks and investment firms are scrambling to
integrate financing in a dizzying array of new life-cycle costing instruments,
revenue sharing agreements and public-private partnerships.

Consider Guangzhou’s new bus rapid transit system (photo above, Karl Fjelstrom), now the
largest in Asia, or Mexico City’s Metrobus system. Both were supported by
private foundations, while Mexico City’s Metrobus also garnered support from an
international and Mexican non-governmental organization. Green economic innovation
is not just occurring in developing nation cities. San Francisco was able to
achieve a leadership role in solar energy projects through a voter-supported
bond measure, while Berkeley created its groundbreaking residential PV solar
financing program through a mortgage-like approach that cuts costs
and financial risks for homeowners.

Global Green Cities will host breakout sessions on the:

  • design of livable, compact, transit oriented
    cities;
  • technologies of digital, efficient and
    low-carbon urban systems;
  • behaviors and lifestyles of the urbanite

A “Breakout Synthesis” will focus on how planning,
technology and behavior can provide a specific vision for the future.

In a wrap-up discussion of the Global Green Cities plenary
session, I will address the issue “Enabling the Green City of the Future,”
which will look at best practices and driving change in finance, policy and
business. On Friday Feb. 25, the conference goes off-site to study planning for
sea level rises caused by climate change. It will also analyze California’s
planning for its landmark state climate change bill of 2006, AB 32, and its
companion, SB 375, a historic land use planning law trying to prevent further
exurban sprawl while enabling denser, transit-oriented development in existing
communities. 

Here’s a preview of who will address the invitation-only
gathering of “Global Green Cities,” which is sponsored by Deutsche Bank, Cisco,
AT&T and the Bay Area Economic Institute and is advised by the London
School of Economics:

Top confirmed speakers include Bruce Katz, of the Brookings
Institute’s Metropolitan Policy Program
 
(recent Time magazine essay and video); Peter Calthorpe–he created the
term “transit-oriented development”–of Calthorpe Associates; Khoo Teng Chye of
the Singapore Public Utilities Board; Kent Larsen, of MIT’s Smart Cities
Changing Places Research Group; Siegfried Zhiqiang Wu, of Shanghai’sTongji University
College of Architect and Planning; James Sweeney, Director of Stanford
University’s Precourt Energy Efficiency Center; Jeffrey Heller of Heller-Manus
Architects
; John Kriken of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill; Incheon, South Korea
Mayor Young-gil Song; San Jose, USA Mayor Check Reed and Dmitri Zenghelis, of
the London School of Economics.

Many others are invited, and I will provide another post reviewing this seminal symposium.

One last sober observation. By all appearances, there
appears to be no “Plan B.”

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current. He is a fellow at the
Post-Carbon Institute, strategic adviser to the Institute for Strategic Resilience and co-author of
a forthcoming United Nations manual on global sustainable city planning and management. 
 

Share